[Xmca-l] Re: ISCAR experiences, reflections, etc

[mike cole]

Rod et al --

First of all THANKS for passing along events/ideas that caught your special
attention at ISCAR. I had only the disembodied experience of commenting on
Yrjo's talk even though I could not see him from the camera located at the
back of the room and having
no time for interchange at all.

The passage quoted by Larry from Rod's original note gave rise to a
different line of thinking in me.

“Having the opportunity to take conversations forward beyond initial
disagreement helped me to see the 'agreed' meaning (znachenie) of
perezhivanie as a fluid, dynamic product of continuing interactions - both
influencing and influenced by the particular refractions of individual
interpretations (smysl). Our 'own' understanding is immeasurably enriched
by opportunities to encounter and engage with other people's perspectives -
not just what they think and know but also what they care about!”

I thought this was as neat a summary of the distinction between meaning and
sense as I have ever seen. It was particularly provoking to me because I
spent so much time discussing this concept with both Russian and English
speaking colleagues in recent years. Anyway, some of the questions it got
me to mull over.

The term, perezhivanie, is polysemic in Russian. How could it not be
polysemic in English? In fact, it is polysemic in Vygotsky's own writings
(in ways that are totally obfuscated in (for example) the translation of *The
Psychology of Art. *Andy's essay in the MCA issue on perezhivanie lays out
that territory pretty well.

What would people say if we asked for THE definition of the english word,
"experience" or even if we asked for a clear understanding of Dewey's
meaning(s) of experience over the course of his long lifetime?

I also thought immediately of my current discomfort with the way that the
term, learning, is used in the literature I read on education and
development.

And finally, i was reminded of the idea I attribute to Roy D'Andrade to the
effect that every definition is a covert theory. Terms like perezhivanie in
our discourse here seem most certainly saturated with theoretical
assumptions linked to other concepts in the theory.

end of time for such thoughts.
thanks for provoking them.
mike

A coupl



On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 9:11 AM, Rauno Huttunen <rakahu@utu.fi> wrote:

> Hello Antti and Andy,
>
> I just make comment on "the ontological/epistemological foundation of
> Marx". In different Marx's text we can found a little bit different
> epistemological and ontological views or implications. Example Feurbach
> thesis presents different world view than Das Kapital. There are great
> differences even between Grundrisse and Das Kapital (It is hard to find
> basis and überbau in Das Kapital). And in Marx's political writings have no
> straight relation to his "scientific writings" - In Das Kapital there is no
> place for political struggle. Of course these questions are under debate.
>
> But yes,  that the ontological/epistemological foundation of Marx are
> still interesting in today. One can found realistic epistemology or
> constructionist epistemology depending on which Marx's text one reads, but
> they all are interesting and relevant in nowadays context.
>
> Rauno Huttunen
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@
> mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Antti Rajala
> Sent: 6. syyskuuta 2017 18:44
> To: Andy Blunden; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: ISCAR experiences, reflections, etc
>
> Andy, thanks for these thoughts and your welcoming words. I agree with your
> reading of the Vygotsky's essay. I think Vygotsky also said that the
> Marxist psychology could not be found in Marx's text but had to be created.
> In this he used Marx method, as you pointed out.
>
> I am no expert of Marxism but found the discussion in the symposium
> interesting. The discussion was sparked by the presentations of Carl Ratner
> and Thomas Teo respectively. If I remember it right, Teo complemented
> Marx's original insights with some more postmodernist theorizing, whereas
> Ratner appeared to rely more on a more traditional reading of Marx.
>
> Andy, to what extent do you think that the ontological/epistemological
> foundation of Marx is still valid today? (perhaps too broad a question). I
> am looking forward to read the hopefully forthcoming review of the edited
> volume by Ratner and Nunes Henrique Silva on Vygotsky and Marx in MCA.
>
> Antti
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 2:40 PM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net> wrote:
>
> > Antti,
> >
> > I think the development of a tradition of practice (such as Marxism)
> means
> > continually returning to the original sources and *digging deeper* into
> > them, while responding to the problems thrown up by the present world.
> What
> > Vygotsky ridiculed was not just the re-assertion of the original sources,
> > but their mindless and superficial repetition. Whenever Marxism has
> fallen
> > into crisis, it has sparked a "return to Marx" - not to go back to an
> > original truth, but to look again at what was being taken for granted,
> and
> > find new sources of inspiration. Vygotsky did this in his reading of
> > /Capital/ in particular.
> >
> > Andy
> >
> > (PS Nice to hear your voice on this list, Antti)
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------
> > Andy Blunden
> > http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm
> > https://andyblunden.academia.edu/research
> >
> > On 6/09/2017 3:29 PM, Antti Rajala wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >> In ISTP (Theory & Psychology) conference in Tokyo a couple of weeks ago
> >> there was a session on Vygotsky and Marxism, in which a similar issue
> was
> >> raised: whether the Marxist research should be continually updated as a
> >> living tradition or be more original to the sources. Wasn't it Vygotsky
> >> himself who emphasized the former position in his essay on the Crisis of
> >> Psychology when he mocked people who were just picking citations from
> Marx
> >> book and pretending that's Marxist psychology.
> >>
> >> On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 1:44 AM, Rod Parker-Rees <
> >> R.Parker-Rees@plymouth.ac.uk> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Alfredo,
> >>>
> >>> Yes, my feeling is that it is better if different people are able to
> >>> pursue different paths so they are able to develop (and hopefully
> share)
> >>> different perspectives. One of the things we take away from a
> conference
> >>> (as, in different ways, from other forms of interaction) is a richer
> >>> sense
> >>> of the ways in which other people see things differently. Knowing a bit
> >>> about how others see things helps to enrich the possibilities available
> >>> to
> >>> us - so we become more than just our own selves.
> >>>
> >>> All the best,
> >>>
> >>> Rod
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@
> >>> mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Alfredo Jornet Gil
> >>> Sent: 05 September 2017 21:59
> >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
> >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: ISCAR experiences, reflections, etc
> >>>
> >>> I think I got this e-mail back from the server, here I try again.
> >>> ________________________________________
> >>> From: Alfredo Jornet Gil
> >>> Sent: 05 September 2017 19:07
> >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> >>> Subject: Re: ISCAR experiences, reflections, etc
> >>>
> >>> Jaakko, yes, I agree with you those in between sessions, and the after
> >>> sessions too, are part of the best these type of congress offers. I am
> >>> happy I could enjoy some of that with you in Quebec! It was a real
> >>> pleasure.
> >>>
> >>> Rod, yes, it would have been so great meeting you too.  In any case,
> >>> concerning perezhivanie and other notions, I am glad thta you bring
> this
> >>> distinction between those who seek to defend some 'core, true meaning',
> >>> and
> >>> those who attempt to bring those notions into new uses etc. This seems
> to
> >>> be at the heart of the field today, and definitely resonates with
> >>> discussions having gone on here. I don't think, (nor probably do you)
> >>> that
> >>> in most cases the dichotomy is that straightforward; rather, there
> seems
> >>> to
> >>> be a tension between one's efforts to build on a given body of scholar
> >>> work
> >>> in a coherent manner, and one's goals of addressing real, contemporary
> >>> problems. I feel that here at xmca we tend to be very strong on the
> >>> former
> >>> effort, but could be better in the latter. Just my sense. Cheers,
> Alfredo
> >>> ________________________________________
> >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
> >
> >>> on behalf of Rod Parker-Rees <R.Parker-Rees@plymouth.ac.uk>
> >>> Sent: 05 September 2017 11:17
> >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: ISCAR experiences, reflections, etc
> >>>
> >>> Dear Alfredo,
> >>>
> >>> I am sorry I did not get the opportunity to meet you at ISCAR.
> >>>
> >>> The highlight of the conference for me was the opportunity to explore a
> >>> wide range of different perspectives on key aspects of
> >>> cultural-historical
> >>> research. The first meeting of the round-table discussion group
> focusing
> >>> on
> >>> perezhivanie was well attended and somewhat chaotic, as a lot of people
> >>> set
> >>> out their own understanding of the significance of this concept. Here
> >>> there
> >>> was only time for an initial presentation of positions - and the
> >>> beginnings
> >>> of exploration of disagreements but the topic was also addressed in
> many
> >>> paper presentations and the second and third round-table meetings were
> >>> smaller, allowing more extensive discussion, which I thought was
> >>> particularly valuable in clarifying why perezhivanie is such a useful
> >>> (and
> >>> flexible) concept.
> >>>
> >>> Discussions at the conference illustrated the tensions between those
> who
> >>> seek to defend a core, 'true' meaning (through careful historical
> >>> analysis
> >>> of documents and arguments) and those who want to loosen the boundaries
> >>> of
> >>> what 'counts' as perezhivanie so that the concept can be used in new
> ways
> >>> and in new contexts. Having the opportunity to take conversations
> forward
> >>> beyond initial disagreement helped me to see the 'agreed' meaning
> >>> (znachenie) of perezhivanie as a fluid, dynamic product of continuing
> >>> interactions - both influencing and influenced by the particular
> >>> refractions of individual interpretations (smysl). Our 'own'
> >>> understanding
> >>> is immeasurably enriched by opportunities to encounter and engage with
> >>> other people's perspectives - not just what they think and know but
> also
> >>> what they care about! My understanding of the writing of Fernando
> >>> Gonzalez
> >>> Rey, Anna Stetsenko, Barbara Rogoff, Nikolai Veresov and many others
> will
> >>> be informed by what I have learned from seeing how they present their
> own
> >>> understandings but also, in different but equally important ways, from
> >>> seeing how they engage with other people and with other people's ideas.
> >>>
> >>> All the best,
> >>>
> >>> Rod
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@
> >>> mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Alfredo Jornet Gil
> >>> Sent: 02 September 2017 19:36
> >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
> >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] ISCAR experiences, reflections, etc
> >>>
> >>> Dear all,
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> I am still at Tampere, where the EARLI conference finished today, just
> >>> one
> >>> day after ISCAR ended. Unfortunately, I committed to attending both
> >>> conferences and could only be the first days in Quebec. Still, I was
> >>> fortunate enough to catch up with many colleagues, to share some of my
> >>> work, and get to hear about that of many others that are doing great
> >>> things
> >>> around the globe.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> One (not so) surprising discovery I made was the huge amount of people
> >>> that actually lurks into this list, but who nonetheless very seldom if
> >>> ever
> >>> write (whether for lack of time to delve into the sometimes quite long
> >>> posts/themes, or simply because they prefer to read than write). We all
> >>> knew and had talked about this, but it was quite remarkable the amount
> of
> >>> people I met (not only in ISCAR, but also here in Europe (EARLI).
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> So, now that I have met some of you, and that you have got to see and
> >>> hear
> >>> more of ISCAR than those of us who had to leave earlier or could not
> join
> >>> at all. What was your highlight of the congress and why? It would be
> >>> lovely
> >>> if some of you would take a step forward and tell us a bit of what you
> >>> found most interesting, what you found was missing, what you found
> should
> >>> have not been.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> In can be the first: One of my favourite moments was listening to
> >>> Fernando
> >>> G. Rey present without slides or any other device, passionately talking
> >>> about child development and claiming, "... for the first need of the
> >>> child
> >>> is that of contact with other people"... I also very much enjoyed
> seeing
> >>> Mike in a several meters wide screen commenting on Engeström's Keynote,
> >>> rising the longest ovation I got to hear during my brief three days in
> >>> Quebec.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> These are just anecdotes, but I would love if you could tell us more on
> >>> how it went for you, what you found there, for us who could not be
> >>> there. I
> >>> think it would be very much appreciated by many, while we get the time
> to
> >>> have a look at the issue on unit analysis, and prepare the discussion
> on
> >>> the article from the last (third) MCA issue.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Alfredo
> >>> ________________________________
> >>> [http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/images/email_footer.gif]<http:
> >>> //www.plymouth.ac.uk/worldclass>
> >>>
> >>> This email and any files with it are confidential and intended solely
> for
> >>> the use of the recipient to whom it is addressed. If you are not the
> >>> intended recipient then copying, distribution or other use of the
> >>> information contained is strictly prohibited and you should not rely on
> >>> it.
> >>> If you have received this email in error please let the sender know
> >>> immediately and delete it from your system(s). Internet emails are not
> >>> necessarily secure. While we take every care, Plymouth University
> accepts
> >>> no responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan
> >>> emails
> >>> and their attachments. Plymouth University does not accept
> responsibility
> >>> for any changes made after it was sent. Nothing in this email or its
> >>> attachments constitutes an order for goods or services unless
> accompanied
> >>> by an official order form.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ________________________________
> >>> [http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/images/email_footer.gif]<http:
> >>> //www.plymouth.ac.uk/worldclass>
> >>>
> >>> This email and any files with it are confidential and intended solely
> for
> >>> the use of the recipient to whom it is addressed. If you are not the
> >>> intended recipient then copying, distribution or other use of the
> >>> information contained is strictly prohibited and you should not rely on
> >>> it.
> >>> If you have received this email in error please let the sender know
> >>> immediately and delete it from your system(s). Internet emails are not
> >>> necessarily secure. While we take every care, Plymouth University
> accepts
> >>> no responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan
> >>> emails
> >>> and their attachments. Plymouth University does not accept
> responsibility
> >>> for any changes made after it was sent. Nothing in this email or its
> >>> attachments constitutes an order for goods or services unless
> accompanied
> >>> by an official order form.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
>
>